Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37998568›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

The Visual Patient Avatar ICU Facilitates Information Transfer of Written Information by Visualization: A Multicenter Comparative Eye-Tracking Study.

Julie Viautour, Lukas Naegeli, Julia Braun, Lisa Bergauer, Tadzio R Roche, David W Tscholl, Samira Akbas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Julie ViautourInstitute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
Lukas NaegeliMaster Program in Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Hirschengraben 84, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland.
Julia BraunDepartments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Hirschengraben 84, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8359-6177
Lisa BergauerInstitute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
Tadzio R RocheInstitute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1072-5748
David W TschollInstitute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3677-3705
Samira AkbasInstitute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7692-4718

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient monitoring is crucial in critical care medicine. Perceiving and interpreting multiple vital signs requires a high workload that can lead to decreased situation awareness and consequently inattentional blindness, defined as impaired perception of unexpectedly changing data. To facilitate information transfer, we developed and validated the Visual-Patient avatar. Generated by numerical data, the animation displays the status of vital signs and patient installations according to a user-centered design to improve situation awareness. As a surrogate parameter for information transfer in patient monitoring, we recorded visual attention using eye-tracking data. In this computer-based study, we compared the correlation of visually perceived and correctly interpreted vital signs between a Visual-Patient-avatar ICU and conventional patient monitoring. A total of 50 recruited study participants (25 nurses, 25 physicians) from five European study centers completed five randomized scenarios in both modalities. Using a stationary eye tracker as the primary endpoint, we recorded how long different areas of interest of the two monitoring modalities were viewed. In addition, we tested for a possible association between the length of time an area of interest was viewed and the correctness of the corresponding question. With the conventional monitor, participants looked at the installation site the longest (median 2.13-2.51 s). With the Visual-Patient-avatar ICU, gaze distribution was balanced; no area of interest was viewed for particularly long. For both modalities, the longer an area was viewed, the more likely the associated question was answered incorrectly (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.99,

Indexed as

avatar-based monitoringeye trackingsituation awarenessVisual-Patient-avatar ICUvisual perception

Identifiers

PMID37998568
PMCPMC10670428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.